News Publication Date: 11 June 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ISLE OF MAN
CIVIL DIVISION
CHANCERY PROCEDURE
IN THE MATTER of the Action (CHP 12/0001) between:
(1) ISIS INVESTMENTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATON) Claimant
and
(1) KAUPTHING FINANCE EHF
(2) KAUPTHING HF Defendants
and
IN THE MATTER of the Action (CHP 12/0003) between:
(1) ISIS INVESTMENTS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) Claimant
and
(1) MOIRA THOMSON McHARRIE
(2) DAVID ANTHONY KARRAN
(3) SIGURDUR EINARSSON Defendants
and
IN THE MATTER of the Application Notice dated 3 May 2012 of Moira Thomson McHarrie and David Antony Karran (the “3 May Application”)
and
IN THE MATTER of the Application Notice dated 21 May 2012 of Isis Investments Limited (In Liquidation) for consolidation, transfer of proceedings and other relief
Judgment Summary issued by the High Court of Justice of the Isle of Man
This summary is provided to assist in understanding the judgment of the court. It does not form part of the judgment. The judgment itself is the only
authoritative document. The full judgment is available at www.judgments.im.
On 7 June 2012 His Honour Deemster Doyle First Deemster and Clerk of the Rolls sitting in the High Court of Justice of the Isle of Man Civil Division Chancery Procedure delivered a judgment which gave reasons for consolidating two sets of proceedings and transferring them to the Ordinary Procedure.
Deemster Doyle referred to the new litigation culture under the Rules of the High Court of Justice 2009 (“the 2009 Rules”) and stressed the obligations on the parties and their legal representatives to help the court in furtherance of the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly.
The First Deemster summarised the position at paragraphs 37 and 38 of his judgment as follows:
'37. In the new litigation culture it is imperative that the parties and their legal representatives focus on the main areas of dispute between them which require judicial determination. Parties and their legal representatives must co-operate in narrowing the focus of the main areas of dispute. Those in dispute should first of all use their best endeavours to resolve their dispute without recourse to expensive and protracted legal proceedings. If legal proceedings are necessary then they should be dealt with expeditiously, fairly and efficiently within a short period of time and at a reasonable cost.
38. This court wishes to discourage unnecessary procedural jousting or to use Judge of Appeal Hytner’s words the unnecessary ploughing of extensive furrows through the field of interlocutory litigation and the ritual dance through the Rules. Issues in dispute should be dealt with on their merits in accordance with the substantive rights and legal obligations of the parties. If they cannot be resolved by sensible negotiation, mediation and settlement then judicial determination will be necessary. Legal proceedings should however normally be the last resort of the parties. Once legal proceedings are issued the parties and their legal advisers and representatives including advocates must do all they can to fairly and expeditiously progress the case and strictly comply with case management directions to ensure a judicial determination of the legal issues in dispute within a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost. The court will engage in active and robust case management in furtherance of the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly.'
Deemster Doyle stated that where the parties find themselves in dispute over purely procedural matters they are required to co-operate in making a real attempt to explore the significant narrowing of, or compromise of, the procedural dispute for the purpose of avoiding disproportionate expense and the taking up of excessive court time.
The First Deemster reiterated the comments he had made in the Shepherds Select Funds plc case (CHP 12/0057 judgment delivered 22nd May 2012) namely that in future litigants must try a little harder to help the court to further the overriding objective of dealing with matters justly and advocates must try a little harder in assisting the court in the proper and efficient administration of justice. Litigants and their advocates must enthusiastically take on board the new litigation culture under the 2009 Rules.